St Helens Borough Council v TE and another (SEN)
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Judge Ward |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] UKUT 278 (AAC) |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) |
| Subject Matter | Special educational needs,Special educational needs - special educational provision - naming school or other institution in EHC plan,Ward,C |
| Date | 15 August 2018 |
| Published date | 05 September 2018 |
St Helens BC v TE and another [2018] UKUT 278 (AAC)
1
IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL Case No HS/1469/2018
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE WARD
Attendances:
For the Appellant: Mr M Mensah, instructed by Jan Bakewell,
Head of Legal Services
For the Respondent: Mr D Wolfe QC, instructed by Simpson
Millar
Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
Pursuant to rule 12(4) of the Upper Tribunal’s rules of procedure I direct that
any application for permission to appeal against this decision must be
received by 17 September 2018, with the consequence that rule 12(3) does
not apply.
REASONS FOR DECISION
1. This case concerns the education of F, a boy aged 7, who has autistic
spectrum disorder (“ASD”). By the second of the two hearing dates before the
First-tier Tribunal (“FtT”), the local authority was proposing that school R, a
maintained primary school with a resource base, be named in section I, while
the parents sought school O, an independent special school approved under
s.41 of the Children and Families Act 2014.
2. The FtT named the latter and the local authority now appeals, with
permission of the Deputy Chamber President of the FtT.
3. I am grateful to Mr Mensah and Mr Wolfe, neither of whom had appeared
below, for their submissions at the oral hearing. At the end of the hearing,
bearing in mind the desirability of the parties knowing the decision in good
time before the start of the Autumn term, I announced that the appeal was
dismissed, with reasons in writing to follow. These are the reasons.
4. Section 38(3) of the 2014 Act specifies a list of types of school or other
institution which fall within the mechanism for which s.39 provides. They
include schools approved under s.41. Where a parent requests a school on
the s.38(3) list, sections 39 (3) –(5) provide as follows:
“(3) The local authority must secure that the EHC plan names the
school or other institution specified in the request, unless subsection
(4) applies.
(4) This subsection applies where—
To continue reading
Request your trial